Oncoplastic breast conservation does not lead to a delay in the commencement of adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients

The American Society of Breast Surgeons classification system for oncoplastic breast conserving surgery independently predicts the risk of delayed wound healing

INTRODUCTION

Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (OBCS) aims to provide safe and satisfying surgery for breast cancer patients. The American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) classification system is based on volumetric displacement cut-offs (level I for <20% of breast volume; level II for 20-50%). It aims to facilitate communication among treating physicians and patients. Here, we investigate whether the extent of OBCS as classified by ASBrS independently predicts postoperative complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database included patients with stage I-III breast cancer who underwent OBCS between 03/2011 and 12/2020 at a Swiss university hospital. Outcomes included short-term (≤30 days) complications and chronic (>30 days) pain after surgery. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify independent predictors.

RESULTS

In total, 439 patients were included, 314 (71.5%) received ASBrS level I surgery, and 125 (28.5%) underwent ASBrS level II surgery. ASBrS level II was found to be an independent predictor of delayed wound healing (odds ratio [OR] 9.75, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 2.96-32.10). However, ASBrS level did not predict chronic postoperative pain (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.20, 95%CI 0.85-1.70), as opposed to age (IRR 1.19, 95%CI 1.11-1.27 per 5 years decrease), and weight disorders (underweight [BMI <18.5] vs. normal weight [BMI 18.5 < 25]: IRR 4.02, 95%CI 1.70-9.54; obese [BMI ≥30] vs. normal weight: IRR 2.07, 95%CI 1.37-3.13).

CONCLUSION

ASBrS level II surgery predicted delayed wound healing, warranting close clinical follow-up and prompt treatment to avoid delays in adjuvant therapy.

Surgeon Factors Influencing Breast Surgery Outcomes: A Scoping Review to Define the Modern Breast Surgical Oncologist

BACKGROUND

Modern breast surgical oncology incorporates many aspects of care including preoperative workup, surgical management, and multidisciplinary collaboration to achieve favorable oncologic outcomes and high patient satisfaction. However, there is variability in surgical practice and outcomes. This review aims to identify modifiable surgeon factors influencing breast surgery outcomes and provide a definition of the modern breast surgical oncologist.

METHODS

A systematic literature search with additional backward citation searching was conducted. Studies describing modifiable surgeon factors with associated breast surgery outcomes such as rates of breast conservation, sentinel node biopsy, re-excision, complications, acceptable esthetic outcome, and disease-free and overall survival were included. Surgeon factors were categorized for qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 91 studies met inclusion criteria describing both modifiable surgeon factor and outcome data. Four key surgeon factors associated with improved breast surgery outcomes were identified: surgical volume (45 studies), use of oncoplastic techniques (41 studies), sub-specialization in breast surgery or surgical oncology (9 studies), and participation in professional development activities (5 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the literature review, the modern breast surgical oncologist has a moderate- to high-volume breast surgery practice, understands the use and application of oncoplastic breast surgery, engages in additional training opportunities, maintains memberships in relevant societies, and remains up to date on key literature. Surgeons practicing in breast surgical oncology can target these modifiable factors for professional development and quality improvement.

Does Immediate Breast Reconstruction Lead to a Delay in Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer? A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Timely delivery of adjuvant chemotherapy is crucial. With an increasing frequency of immediate breast reconstructions (IBR) following mastectomy (MAS), concerns have arisen regarding its complication rates and effects on time to chemotherapy. The aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine if there is a prolonged time to chemotherapy (TTC) after IBR and MAS. Electronic databases, reference lists and relevant articles were searched systematically. Eligibility criteria included women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy who underwent either MAS only or MAS and IBR. Random-effects models were used in the analysis. A total of 29 studies were included in qualitative analysis, comprising of 156,000 patients (IBR: 57,159; MAS: 98,841). But 23 studies had sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis. Sixteen papers concluded there was no difference in TTC compared to MAS. There was a difference of 3.50 days between TTC in IBR versus MAS (95% CI [0.42, 6.57], P value = .0256; IBR = 43.56 days, MAS = 40.38 days). The rate of patients being delayed past 90 days was not significantly higher in IBR (OR = 1.34, 95% CI [0.76, 2.38], P = .310). IBR patients were more likely to have complications compared to the MAS group (OR = 2.04, 95% CI [1.04-4.01], P < .01). We concluded that there is a statistically significant longer time to chemotherapy following IBR of 3.50 days, yet there is no difference in delays past 90 days. Therefore, the longer TTC in IBR is unlikely to be of any clinical significance.

Secondary Surgeries After Oncoplastic Reduction Mammoplasty

PURPOSE

The oncoplastic reduction approach is a popular option for women with breast cancer and macromastia. Although the benefits of this approach are numerous, data on the need for secondary surgeries are limited. We evaluated the need for all secondary surgeries after oncoplastic reduction in an attempt to understand the incidence and indications.

METHODS

All patients with breast cancer who underwent an oncoplastic breast reduction at the time of the tumor resection were queried from a prospectively maintained database from 1998 to 2020 (n = 547) at a single institution. Secondary surgical procedures were defined as any unplanned return to the operating room. Demographic and clinical variables were analyzed, and secondary surgeries were classified and evaluated. The timing and rates of secondary surgery were evaluated and compared with clinical variables.

RESULTS

There were 547 patients included in this series with a mean age of 55 years and body mass index of 33.5. Mean duration of follow-up was 3.8 years. One hundred and seventeen (21%) patients underwent 235 secondary surgeries, with an average of 1.4 operations until stable reconstruction was obtained. The reason for the secondary surgery was involved margins (7.5%), major complications (8.6%), aesthetic improvement (13.3%), and completion mastectomy (5.3%). Age 65 years and younger age was associated with any subsequent procedure (P = 0.023) and revision for cosmesis (P = 0.006). Patients with body mass index greater than 35 had increased secondary surgeries for operative complications (P = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary surgeries after oncoplastic breast reduction procedures are common. Management of margins and complications, such as hematoma and infection, are early indications, with aesthetic improvement, wound healing complications, fat necrosis, and recurrence being late reasons. The most common reason for reoperation is aesthetic improvement, especially in younger patients. Attention to surgical technique and patient selection will help minimize secondary surgeries for the nononcological reasons.

Impact of Oncoplastic Breast Surgery on Rate of Complications, Time to Adjuvant Treatment, and Risk of Recurrence

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the risk of complications and recurrence between oncoplastic and conventional breast surgery.

Methods

This is a retrospective analysis of a consecutive series of 436 patients with stage I-III breast cancer who underwent surgery at the University Hospital of Basel between 2011 and 2018.

Results

The nipple/skin-sparing mastectomy (NSM/SSM) group showed significantly more delayed wound healing (32.7 vs. 5.8%, p < 0.001) and skin necrosis (13.9 vs. 1.9%, p = 0.020) compared to conventional mastectomy (CM), which corresponded to significantly higher odds of short-term complications (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.02-5.35, p = 0.044). The incidence rate of long-term morbidity in oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) was significantly higher compared to conventional breast-conserving surgery (CBCS; 25.5 vs. 11.3 per 100 patient years [PY], p < 0.001), in particular concerning chronic pain (13.3 vs. 6.6, p = 0.011) and lymphedema (4.1 vs. 0.4, p = 0.003). Seroma as a long-term morbidity occurred more often in the CM group compared to the NSM/SSM group (5.8 vs. 0.5 per 100 PY, p = 0.004). Patients received adjuvant treatment earlier after CM compared to NSM/SSM (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.05-3.19, p = 0.034). There were no significant differences in the incidence of positive margins nor in the odds of recurrence after OBCS versus CBCS and after NSM/SSM versus CM.

Conclusions

Even though the present study confirmed expected differences in complications and morbidity, it suggested that oncoplastic surgery is oncologically safe. Patients undergoing NSM/SSM should be followed closely to allow early detection and treatment of frequently associated complications and ensure timely start of adjuvant therapy.

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery for women with primary breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) involves removing the tumour in the breast and using plastic surgery techniques to reconstruct the breast. The adequacy of published evidence on the safety and efficacy of O-BCS for the treatment of breast cancer compared to other surgical options for breast cancer is still debatable. It is estimated that the local recurrence rate is similar to standard breast-conserving surgery (S-BCS) and also mastectomy, but the aesthetic and patient-reported outcomes may be improved with oncoplastic techniques.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to assess oncological control outcomes following O-BCS compared with other surgical options for women with breast cancer. Our secondary objective was to assess surgical complications, recall rates, need for further surgery to achieve adequate oncological resection, patient satisfaction through patient-reported outcomes, and cosmetic outcomes through objective measures or clinician-reported outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via OVID), Embase (via OVID), the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov on 7 August 2020. We did not apply any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies (cohort and case-control studies). Studies evaluated any O-BCS technique, including volume displacement techniques and partial breast volume replacement techniques compared to any other surgical treatment (partial resection or mastectomy) for the treatment of breast cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors performed data extraction and resolved disagreements. We used ROBINS-I to assess the risk of bias by outcome. We performed descriptive data analysis and meta-analysis and evaluated the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria. The outcomes included local recurrence, breast cancer-specific disease-free survival, re-excision rates, complications, recall rates, and patient-reported outcome measures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 78 non-randomised cohort studies evaluating 178,813 women. Overall, we assessed the risk of bias per outcome as being at serious risk of bias due to confounding; where studies adjusted for confounding, we deemed these at moderate risk. Comparison 1: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus standard-BCS (S-BCS) The evidence in the review found that O-BCS when compared to S-BCS, may make little or no difference to local recurrence; either when measured as local recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.34; 4 studies, 7600 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or local recurrence rate (HR 1.33, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.83; 4 studies, 2433 participants; low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain due to most studies not controlling for confounding clinicopathological factors. O-BCS compared to S-BCS may make little to no difference to disease-free survival (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.26; 7 studies, 5532 participants; low-certainty evidence). O-BCS may reduce the rate of re-excisions needed for oncological resection (risk ratio (RR) 0.76, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.85; 38 studies, 13,341 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. O-BCS may increase the number of women who have at least one complication (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.27; 20 studies, 118,005 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and increase the recall to biopsy rate (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.67 to 3.42; 6 studies, 715 participants; low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis was not possible when assessing patient-reported outcomes or cosmetic evaluation; in general, O-BCS reported a similar or more favourable result, however, the evidence is very uncertain due to risk of bias in the measurement methods. Comparison 2: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus mastectomy alone O-BCS may increase local recurrence-free survival compared to mastectomy but the evidence is very uncertain (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.91; 2 studies, 4713 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of O-BCS on disease-free survival as there were only data from one study. O-BCS may reduce complications compared to mastectomy, but the evidence is very uncertain due to high risk of bias mainly resulting from confounding (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83; 4 studies, 4839 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Data on patient-reported outcome measures came from single studies; it was not possible to meta-analyse the data. Comparison 3: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus mastectomy with reconstruction O-BCS may make little or no difference to local recurrence-free survival (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.62; 1 study, 3785 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or disease-free survival (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.22; 1 study, 317 participants; very low-certainty evidence) when compared to mastectomy with reconstruction, but the evidence is very uncertain. O-BCS may reduce the complication rate compared to mastectomy with reconstruction (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.54; 5 studies, 4973 participants; very low-certainty evidence) but the evidence is very uncertain due to high risk of bias from confounding and inconsistency of results. The evidence is very uncertain for patient-reported outcome measures and cosmetic evaluation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is very uncertain regarding oncological outcomes following O-BCS compared to S-BCS, though O-BCS has not been shown to be inferior. O-BCS may result in less need for a second re-excision surgery but may result in more complications and a greater recall rate than S-BCS. It seems that O-BCS may give better patient satisfaction and surgeon rating for the look of the breast, but the evidence for this is of poor quality, and due to lack of numerical data, it was not possible to pool the results of different studies. It seems O-BCS results in fewer complications compared with surgeries involving mastectomy. Based on this review, no certain conclusions can be made to help inform policymakers. The surgical decision for what operation to proceed with should be made jointly between clinician and patient after an appropriate discussion about the risks and benefits of O-BCS personalised to the patient, taking into account clinicopathological factors. This review highlighted the deficiency of well-conducted studies to evaluate efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes following O-BCS.

Outcomes of Asian Women Treated With Grisotti Flap Reconstruction for Centrally Located Breast Cancers: 5-Years Single Institutional Experience

INTRODUCTION

Breast conserving surgeries were previously contraindicated for central breast cancers because of poor cosmetic outcomes of central mastectomy without oncoplastic surgery. Grisotti flap is a breast-conserving surgery incorporating oncoplastic surgery technique for centrally located breast cancers. We present our experience and outcome from Breast Surgery Unit, University Malaya Medical Center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective analysis of 15 patients with central retroareolar breast cancer operated from 2012 to 2018 in University Malaya Medical Center. We assessed postoperative complications, margins, locoregional recurrence, and survival outcome. All patients received postoperative radiotherapy. Patients were followed-up 1 week, 1 month, 3 monthly for 1 year and 6 monthly for 5 years.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients is 62 years. Mean follow-up is 51 months (15-84 months). All tumors were less than 5 cm (1-2.5 cm). Majority of the patients are stage 1 (6 patients/40%) and stage 2 (8 patients/ 53.3%). 2 patients had surgical site infection resolved with antibiotics. One patient had hematoma. None require reoperation. Tumor margins were clear in all patients. No locoregional recurrence. Overall survival is 100%. All are satisfied with their cosmetic outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Grisotti flap is a volume displacement technique, which provides satisfactory cosmetic outcome for centrally located breast cancer. This evolutionary thinking leads us to changes in existing techniques with the purpose of achieving oncological safety while reaching for better esthetic results. Our 5 years' experience in Asian population showed that this technique is oncologically safe with good cosmetic outcomes and could be used selectively. It provides a good alternative in patients who are otherwise subjected for mastectomy. This relatively simple technique is a worthwhile endeavor and should be offered when feasible.

Improving Results in Oncoplastic Surgery

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Describe the risks, benefits, and safety profile of oncoplastic procedures for partial breast reconstruction, and how they compare to breast conservation-therapy alone. 2. Have a working knowledge of oncoplastic techniques and how they are addressed from the multidisciplinary perspective. 3. Understand the limitations of oncoplastic techniques and how to avoid unfavorable results.

SUMMARY

Oncoplastic surgical techniques have expanded indications for breast conservation and have improved both oncologic and reconstructive outcomes. This article will focus on some of the barriers to adoption and discuss ways to improve safety through streamlining the process, understanding the oncologic concerns, and evaluating unfavorable outcomes that might interfere with the appropriate delivery of breast cancer care.

Oncoplastic partial breast reconstruction: concepts and techniques

Immediate oncoplastic breast reconstruction performed at the time of breast conserving surgery for the treatment of breast cancer merges the therapeutic goals of complete oncologic extirpation with preservation of breast form and function. A constellation of surgical techniques that employs breast volume displacement and/or replacement methods of varying complexity levels have emerged, thus broadening the potential applications for breast conservation therapy to include cases with increased tumor-to-native breast-volume ratios, multicentric or multifocal disease, and/or previous margin-positive resections. This review describes the various reconstructive methods, including the use of local tissue rearrangement, oncoplastic reduction-mastopexy, and locoregional flaps. Classification of the surgical options into levels I and II volume-displacement and volume-replacing techniques is made. Additionally, we explore the oncologic safety and effectiveness of this treatment paradigm by summarizing existing supportive evidence regarding associated risk of surgical complications, rate of margin-positive resection, implications for radiographic surveillance, local recurrence rates, and patient-reported outcomes. In conclusion, surgeons may use a wide variety of oncoplastic techniques for partial breast reconstruction at the time of segmental mastectomy to deliver effective breast conserving treatment for women with breast cancer. A growing body of literature affirms the oncologic safety of this approach. Future directions for research include long-term follow-up data with emphasis on outcomes from patient perspectives.

The Role of Oncoplastic Surgery for Breast Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) expands the indications and possibilities of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) by allowing for a wider cancer resection than lumpectomy. Ongoing investigation and reporting of OPS outcomes along with improvements in comprehensive training in breast surgical oncology will impact on awareness and lead to increased adoption of these techniques. Indications for OPS include concern about clear margins, poor tumor location (upper inner pole and lower quadrant), multifocality, need for skin excision, and poor candidacy for mastectomy and reconstruction. OPS has been proven to be oncological safe with comparable rates of complications, positive margins, and re-excisions with BCS. Additionally, OPS has a positive impact on the quality of life and self-esteem when compared with those patients that underwent BCT.

Immediate Contralateral Mastopexy/Breast Reduction for Symmetry Can Be Performed Safely in Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery expands the indications for breast conservation. When performed using modified mastopexy/breast reduction techniques, the optimal timing of the contralateral symmetrizing mastopexy/breast reduction remains unclear. This study examined the effect of the timing of symmetrizing mastopexy/breast reduction on oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted of all patients who underwent oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery using mastopexy/breast reduction techniques at a single center from 2010 to 2016. Patients who received synchronous (immediate) contralateral breast symmetrizing mastopexy were compared with those who underwent a delayed symmetrizing mastopexy procedure. Demographic, treatment, and outcome data were collected. Descriptive statistics were used and multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the various relationships.

RESULTS

There were 429 patients (713 breasts) included in the study; of these, 284 patients (568 breasts) underwent oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery involving mastopexy/breast reduction techniques and immediate symmetrizing mastopexy, and 145 patients underwent delayed contralateral symmetrizing mastopexy. The overall complication rate was similar between the immediate and delayed groups (25.4 percent versus 26.9 percent, respectively; p = 0.82), as was the major complication rate (10.6 percent versus 6.2 percent; p = 0.16). Complications resulted in a delay in adjuvant therapy in 18 patients (4.2 percent); in two patients (0.7 percent), this delay resulted from a complication in the contralateral symmetrizing mastopexy breast. Immediate contralateral symmetrizing mastopexy was not associated with increased risk of complications per breast (p = 0.82) or delay to adjuvant therapy (p = 0.6).

CONCLUSION

Contralateral mastopexy/breast reduction for symmetry can be performed at the time of oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery in carefully selected patients without significantly increasing the risk of complications or delay to adjuvant radiation therapy.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Modern surgical treatment of breast cancer

Breast cancer is the most frequent cancer in women all over the world. The prognosis is generally good, with a five-year overall survival rate above 90% for all stages. It is still the second leading cause of cancer-related death among women. Surgical treatment of breast cancer has changed dramatically over the years. Initially, treatment involved major surgery with long hospitalization, but it is now mostly accomplished as an outpatient procedure with a quick recovery. Thanks to well-designed retrospective and randomly controlled prospective studies, guidelines are continually changing. We are presently in an era where safely de-escalating surgery is increasingly emphasized. Breast cancer is a heterogenous disease, where a "one-size-fits-all" treatment approach is not appropriate. There is often more than one surgical solution carrying equal oncological safety for an individual patient. In these situations, it is important to include the patient in the treatment decision-making process through well informed consent. For this to be optimal, the physician must be fully updated on the surgical options. A consequence of an improved prognosis is more breast cancer survivors, and therefore physical appearance and quality of life is more in focus. Modern breast cancer treatment is increasingly personalized from a surgical point of view but is dependent on a multidisciplinary approach. Detailed algorithms for surgery of the breast and the axilla are required for optimal treatment and quality control. This review illustrates how breast cancer treatment has changed over the years and how the current standard is based on high quality scientific research.

Nipple sparing mastectomy with a de-epithelialized derma-fat flap (modified Spira technique) and direct-to implant reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Spira technique is a type of nipple-sparing mastectomy that allows immediate reconstruction (IBR), ideal for ptosic breasts. Although, controversy persists regarding oncological results in breast cancer. The aim is to analyze complications, cosmetic outcomes, causes of reoperation and oncological results.

METHODS

Retrospective observational analysis of patients undergone surgery during 2003-2018 in our center. Study population is based on patients with breast carcinoma or undergoing prophylactic mastectomy due to high-risk, in which a skin-sparing mastectomy with a de-epithelialized derma-fat flap (modified Spira technique) and direct to implant reconstruction was performed. Short and long-term complications, sequelae, tumor recurrence and survival rates are analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 247 mastectomies with immediate reconstruction in 139 patients, 216 bilateral (87.4%) and 31 unilateral (12.5%) were performed. 121 therapeutic (49%) and 126 prophylactic (51%). Median follow-up 81 months. Complications were observed in 16.2%; skin necrosis 5.3% and 5 cases of NAC necrosis (2%). Reoperation rate due to cosmetic sequelae was 17.4% (capsular contracture was the most frequent,11.3%) and a 39.3% of these patients have received RT. Recurrence of 14% (0.8% skin, 3.3% locoregional and 9.9% metastatic), 8 patients died (6.6%). Rates of FSD and OS were 92.6% and 93.3% respectively.

CONCLUSION

Spira mastectomy is a safe option and provides good cosmetic and oncologic results as breast cancer treatment and prophylaxis in moderate-large ptosic breasts.

Body image and its relationship with coping strategies: The views of Iranian breast cancer women following surgery

OBJECTIVE

Breast cancer treatments not only affect body image but also other aspects of women's lives. Women try to accept their appearance through coping strategies. This study aimed to determine the relationship between body image and coping strategies in women with breast cancer following surgery in southeast Iran.

METHODS

This is a descriptive study with correlational design. This study recruited 180 women with breast cancer following surgery via convenience sampling (71 women with mastectomy, 109 women with breast conservative surgery). Data were collected by a three-part questionnaire: Background data; Body Image Scale; Body Image Coping Strategies Inventory, and were analyzed by SPSS 19 and descriptive and analytical statistics (independent t, ANOVA, Pearson's correlation coefficient and linear regression).

RESULTS

The mean score of body image was 14.31 ± 6.61 (ranged from 0 to 30), and coping strategies was 46.16 ± 13.26 (ranged from 0 to 87). According to the mean scores, the women were, on average, satisfied with their body image. The most frequent strategy used was "positive rational acceptance" with a mean score of 23.30 ± 6.19 and the least used strategy was "avoidance" with a mean score of 10.35 ± 4.50. A significant relationship was observed between body image and coping strategies (r = .34, p = .001); women who felt worse about their own body image were found to use more coping strategies.

CONCLUSION

Women using positive rational acceptance were likely to report favorable body image. Thus, promoting positive attitude regarding physical appearance and coping skills screening by trained nurses is recommended for all breast cancer patients after their surgery. Such screenings can result in an appropriate flow of information between nurses and patients about the body image and coping skills applied. Being aware of their positive coping strategies can help women, and prepare them to use the coping strategies required to improve their body image and to enhance their quality of life.

Current practice and short-term outcomes of therapeutic mammaplasty in the international TeaM multicentre prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic mammaplasty, which combines breast reduction and mastopexy techniques with tumour excision, may extend the boundaries of breast-conserving surgery and improve outcomes for patients, but current practice is unknown and high-quality outcome data are lacking. This prospective multicentre cohort study aimed to explore the practice and short-term outcomes of the technique.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing therapeutic mammaplasty at participating centres between 1 September 2016 and 30 June 2017 were recruited to the study. Demographic, preoperative, operative, oncological and complication data were collected. The primary outcome was unplanned reoperation for complications within 30 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes included re-excision rates and time to adjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

Overall, 880 patients underwent 899 therapeutic mammaplasty procedures at 50 centres. The most common indications were avoidance of poor cosmetic outcomes associated with standard breast-conserving surgery (702 procedures, 78·1 per cent) or avoidance of mastectomy (379, 42·2 per cent). Wise-pattern skin incisions were the most common (429 of 899, 47·7 per cent), but a range of incisions and nipple-areola pedicles were used. Immediate contralateral symmetrization was performed in one-third of cases (284 of 880, 32·3 per cent). In total, 205 patients (23·3 per cent) developed a complication, but only 25 (2·8 per cent) required reoperation. Median postoperative lesion size was 24·5 (i.q.r. 16-38) mm. Incomplete excision was seen in 132 procedures (14·7 per cent), but completion mastectomy was required for only 51 lesions (5·7 per cent). Median time to adjuvant therapy was 54 (i.q.r. 42-66) days.

CONCLUSION

Therapeutic mammaplasty is a safe and effective alternative to mastectomy or standard breast-conserving surgery. Further work is required to explore the impact of the technique on quality of life, and to establish cost-effectiveness.

Updated Evidence on the Oncoplastic Approach to Breast Conservation Therapy

The oncoplastic approach to breast conservation therapy has become a useful and popular option for women with breast cancer who wish to preserve their breast. The initial driving forces were aimed at minimizing the potential for a breast conservation therapy deformity; however, various other benefits have been identified that include broadening the indications for breast conservation therapy in some patients and improved margin control. The various techniques can be categorized into glandular rearrangement techniques such as breast reductions usually in patients with larger breasts or flap reconstruction such as the latissimus dorsi muscle usually in patients with smaller breasts. As the acceptance continues to increase, we are starting to see more outcomes evidence in terms of patient satisfaction, quality of life, complications, and recurrence, to further support the safety and efficacy of the oncoplastic approach.

Current standards in oncoplastic breast conserving surgery

Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery is increasingly used to treat patients with breast cancer. In the absence of randomized data, a large body of observational evidence consistently indicates low rates of recurrence and high rates of survival, but points to a higher rate of complications compared to conventional breast conserving surgery. Established goals of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery are to broaden the indication for breast conservation towards larger tumors, and to improve esthetic outcomes. The benefit from the patient's perspective, however, remains largely to be confirmed. There is a growing demand to standardize various aspects of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery for implementation in clinical research and practice. Several classification systems and outcomes measurement tools have been proposed, but to the present day, none of them has achieved international acceptance.

Oncoplastic breast surgery does not delay the onset of adjuvant chemotherapy: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Only a few studies of limited size have examined whether oncoplastic breast surgery delays the onset of adjuvant chemotherapy as compared to conventional breast surgery. We investigated whether oncoplastic breast surgery causes a delay in the onset of adjuvant chemotherapy in comparison to lumpectomy and mastectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study is a population-based cohort study. Within the nationwide registry of the Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG), we identified 1798 patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy following mastectomy, lumpectomy or oncoplastic breast surgery for early and unilateral invasive breast cancer. Women treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were excluded.

RESULTS

We found no significant difference between the three groups (mastectomy, lumpectomy, oncoplastic breast surgery) in the time from biopsy to surgery (mean time 17.9, 17.0 and 18.3 days, respectively), the time from surgery to onset of adjuvant chemotherapy, nor total time from biopsy to the onset of adjuvant chemotherapy (mean time 52.7, 51.9 and 53.2 days, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that oncoplastic breast surgery does not delay the onset of adjuvant chemotherapy in comparison with mastectomy and lumpectomy. Accordingly, patients should not be excluded from treatment with oncoplastic breast surgery due to concerns of delay in adjuvant chemotherapy.

Oncoplastic breast conservation surgery is oncologically safe when compared to wide local excision and mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Support for the oncological safety of oncoplastic breast conservation surgery (OBCS) is mostly based on evidence comparing recurrence rates after OBCS to wide local excision (WLE). However, OBCS is often indicated for larger cancers and oncological results should also be compared to patients treated with mastectomy. In this study we compared recurrence and survival following OBCS, mastectomy and WLE.

METHODS

Patients treated with OBCS between 2009 and 2012 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. For comparison, consecutive patients treated with WLE or mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction (Ms ± IR) over the same time period were identified. Histological variables of patients were compared using Fisher Exact or Chi squared tests, and recurrence and survival were compared using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression survival analysis.

RESULTS

980 patients' data were analysed (OBCS: n = 104; WLE: n = 558; Ms ± IR: n = 318). Tumour size, grade, nodal status, ER, and PR expression of patients treated with OBCS were all significantly more adverse compared with patients treated with WLE (p < 0.001). These histological variables were similar in patients treated with Ms ± IR and OBCS. 5-year local recurrence rates were similar in all three groups (WLE: 3.4 per cent, OBCS: 2 per cent, Ms ± IR: 2.6 per cent; log rank = 0.973), while distant recurrence rates were higher after Ms ± IR and OBCS (Ms ± IR:13.1 per cent, OBCS:7.5 per cent, WLE:3.3 per cent; log rank: p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

OBCS is oncologically safe in patients even when histological results are similar to patients treated with Ms ± IR.

Oncological Outcomes and Complications After Volume Replacement Oncoplastic Breast Conservations-The Glasgow Experience

INTRODUCTION

Oncoplastic breast conservation surgery (OBCS) combines the principles of surgical oncology and plastic surgery. OBCS has now become a growing option for the treatment of breast cancer and forms a part of breast-conserving therapy (BCT). We sought to investigate and report our experience in two breast units in Glasgow (Victoria Infirmary and Western Infirmary) on volume replacement OBCS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Details of patients treated with volume replacement OBCS were identified from a prospectively recorded database from November 2010 to October 2015. The clinical records included in the oncoplastic dataset were analyzed for demographics, tumor, treatment characteristics, and recurrences. The data were analyzed for follow-up to determine the pattern and timing of recurrence up to April 2016. The primary outcome of this study was tumor-free margin resection rates, and the secondary outcomes were locoregional and distant recurrence rates as these correlate with the overall oncological safety of volume replacement oncoplastic breast surgery (OPBS).

RESULTS

A total of 30 volume replacement oncoplastic breast conservation procedures have been carried out in this time period. The mean age of the former group was 51 years. Twice as many patients presented symptomatically than had tumors detected on screening. The mean preoperative tumor size on radiology was 25.4 mm. Patients underwent 13 thoracoepigastric flaps, 5 lateral intercostal artery perforator (LICAP) flaps, 2 thoracodorsal artery perforator (TDAP) flaps, 1 lateral thoracic artery perforator (LTAP) flap, 1 crescent flap volume replacement surgery, and 8 matrix rotations. Two patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Fourteen patients had adjuvant chemotherapy, and all patients were treated with adjuvant radiotherapy. Twenty-two patients were treated with hormonal therapy and four patients were treated with Herceptin. The rate of incomplete excision was 10%. Median follow-up time was 48.5 months. Only one regional recurrence was detected. Eight patients encountered some form of complication.

CONCLUSION

This study continues to show the relative oncological safety of volume replacement oncoplastic conservations as an option for reconstruction in breast cancer patients. Further research is urgently needed to build robust evidence supporting the long-term oncological safety.

The iBRA-2 (immediate breast reconstruction and adjuvant therapy audit) study: protocol for a prospective national multicentre cohort study to evaluate the impact of immediate breast reconstruction on the delivery of adjuvant therapy

INTRODUCTION

Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is routinely offered to improve quality of life for women with breast cancer requiring a mastectomy, but there are concerns that more complex surgery may delay the delivery of adjuvant oncological treatments and compromise long-term oncological outcomes. High-quality evidence, however, is lacking. iBRA-2 is a national prospective multicentre cohort study that aims to investigate the effect of IBR on the delivery of adjuvant therapy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Breast and plastic surgery centres in the UK performing mastectomy with or without (±) IBR will be invited to participate in the study through the trainee research collaborative network. All women undergoing mastectomy ± IBR for breast cancer between 1 July and 31 December 2016 will be included. Patient demographics, operative, oncological and complication data will be collected. Time from last definitive cancer surgery to first adjuvant treatment for patients undergoing mastectomy ± IBR will be compared to determine the impact that IBR has on the time of delivery of adjuvant therapy. Prospective data on 3000 patients from ∼50 centres are anticipated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Research ethics approval is not required for this study. This has been confirmed using the online Health Research Authority decision tool. This novel study will explore whether IBR impacts the time to delivery of adjuvant therapy. The study will provide valuable information to help patients and surgeons make more informed decisions about their surgical options. Dissemination of the study protocol will be via the Mammary Fold Academic and Research Collaborative (MFAC) and the Reconstructive Surgery Trials Network (RSTN), the Association of Breast Surgery (ABS) and the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS). Participating units will have access to their own data and collective results will be presented at relevant surgical conferences and published in appropriate peer-reviewed journals.

Oncoplastic central quadrantectomies

Tumors localized in the central quadrant (centrally located breast tumors) have always represented a challenge for the surgeon because of the critical aesthetical matters related to the nipple-areola complex (NAC). Many years of experience with breast cancer patients treated by using various oncoplastic techniques, has allowed us to develop the modified hemibatwing for the treatment of central breast tumors, where the NAC is involved. Modified hemibatwing-along with the removal of the NAC-is a useful oncoplastic technique and it represents an ideal option for the treatment of central tumors because it assures oncological safety, a reduced surgical timetable and greater aesthetical results.

Operative and Oncologic Outcomes in 9861 Patients with Operable Breast Cancer: Single-Institution Analysis of Breast Conservation with Oncoplastic Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic reconstruction is an approach that enables patients with locally advanced or adversely located tumors to undergo breast conserving surgery (BCS). The objectives were to identify the use of BCS with oncoplastic reconstruction (BCS + R) and determine the operative and oncologic outcomes compared with other breast surgical procedures for breast cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study interrogated a single institution's prospectively maintained databases to identify patients who underwent surgery for breast cancer between 2007 and 2014. Surgeries were categorized as BCS, BCS + R, total mastectomy (TM), or TM with immediate reconstruction (TM + R). Demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics and postoperative complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 10,607 operations performed for 9861 patients. Median follow-up was 3.4 years (range, 0-9.1 years). The use of BCS + R had a nearly fourfold increase in the percentage of all breast cancer surgeries during the study period; 75 % of patients who underwent BCS + R had a T1 or T2 tumor. There was no difference in the use of BCS + R compared with BCS for any quadrant of the breast except the lower outer quadrant (11.1 vs. 6.8 %; p < .0001). BCS + R had a lower rate of seroma formation (13.4 vs. 18 %; p = .002) and positive or close margins compared with BCS (5.8 vs. 8.3 %; p = .04). There was no difference in overall survival or recurrence-free survival when comparing BCS and BCS + R.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing BCS + R are not disadvantaged in terms of complications and short-term (3-year) outcomes compared with BCS patients or patients who underwent TM.

Imaging Results Following Oncoplastic and Standard Breast Conserving Surgery

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) requires more complex surgical techniques than standard wide local excision (WLE) and the postoperative complication rate may be higher. Since these can have an impact on postoperative imaging, we compared imaging and biopsy results after OBCS and WLE.

METHODS

Findings for patients undergoing OBCS (n = 83) or standard WLE (n = 128) were compared. Numbers, indications and outcomes of mammograms, breast ultrasounds, magnetic resonance imaging scans and biopsies done within 2 years after surgery were analysed.

RESULTS

OBCS was applied for more advanced malignancy. Significantly more patients required breast ultrasound after OBCS than WLE (20/71 vs. 17/116; p = 0.024). Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 3 or 4 ultrasound results were found only in patients with OBCS (6/29 vs. 0/19; p = 0.034). Significantly more biopsies were required after OBCS (9/71 vs. 3/116; p = 0.006). New lumps or lumpiness were the commonest indications, and pathology confirmed fat necrosis in the majority (7/12). The rate of fat necrosis after OBCS was 18% on clinical examination (13/71), 15% with ultrasound (11/71) and 7% confirmed on pathology (5/71).

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with OBCS require significantly more ultrasound scans and consequent biopsies than patients who underwent WLE. This is mainly due to fat necrosis developing after OBCS in the majority of cases.

The effect of immediate breast reconstruction on the timing of adjuvant chemotherapy: a systematic review

Adjuvant chemotherapy is often needed to achieve adequate breast cancer control. The increasing popularity of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) raises concerns that this procedure may delay the time to adjuvant chemotherapy (TTC), which may negatively impact oncological outcome. The current systematic review aims to investigate this effect. During October 2014, a systematic search for clinical studies was performed in six databases with keywords related to breast reconstruction and chemotherapy. Eligible studies met the following inclusion criteria: (1) research population consisted of women receiving therapeutic mastectomy, (2) comparison of IBR with mastectomy only groups, (3) TTC was clearly presented and mentioned as outcome measure, and (4) original studies only (e.g., cohort study, randomized controlled trial, case-control). Fourteen studies were included, representing 5270 patients who had received adjuvant chemotherapy, of whom 1942 had undergone IBR and 3328 mastectomy only. One study found a significantly shorter mean TTC of 12.6 days after IBR, four studies found a significant delay after IBR averaging 6.6-16.8 days, seven studies found no significant difference in TTC between IBR and mastectomy only, and two studies did not perform statistical analyses for comparison. In studies that measured TTC from surgery, mean TTC varied from 29 to 61 days for IBR and from 21 to 60 days for mastectomy only. This systematic review of the current literature showed that IBR does not necessarily delay the start of adjuvant chemotherapy to a clinically relevant extent, suggesting that in general IBR is a valid option for non-metastatic breast cancer patients.

How to compare the oncological safety of oncoplastic breast conservation surgery - To wide local excision or mastectomy?

BACKGROUND

Comparative studies suggest that patients treated with oncoplastic breast conservation surgery (OBCS) have similar pathology to patients treated with wide local excision (WLE). However, patients treated with OBCS have never been compared to patients treated with mastectomy. The aim of this study was to identify which control group was comparable to patients undergoing OBCS.

METHODS

Commonly reported histopathological variables of patients treated with OBCS, WLE or mastectomy ± immediate reconstruction (Ms ± IR) were compared using Fisher Exact or Chi squared tests.

RESULTS

1000 patients' data were analysed (OBCS: n = 119; WLE: n = 600; Ms ± IR: n = 281). Tumour size was significantly bigger after OBCS than WLE (p < 0.001), but similar to Ms ± IR (p = 0.138). Tumour grade was higher after OBCS than WLE (p < 0.001), but similar to Ms ± IR (p = 0.497). More axillary nodes were involved in patients with OBCS than WLE (p < 0.001), but comparable to Ms ± IR (p = 0.175). ER and PR expressions were lower after OBCS compared to WLE (p = 0.007, p = 0.009), but identical to Ms ± IR (p = 1, p = 0.904 respectively). Differences in application of systemic (neo)adjuvant therapy followed the above trend.

CONCLUSION

Striking similarities found between OBCS and mastectomy patients' histopathological results are in sharp contrast with previously published data. This study suggests that oncological outcomes following OBCS should be compared to mastectomy besides WLE.